4.5 Article

Multicenter surveillance of species distribution and antifungal susceptibilities of Candida bloodstream isolates in South Korea

期刊

MEDICAL MYCOLOGY
卷 48, 期 4, 页码 669-674

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3109/13693780903410386

关键词

Candida; antifungal susceptibility; candidemia; azoles; echinocandins

资金

  1. IISP of MSD Korea [CCD-MSG-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multicenter data on in vitro susceptibility of Candida bloodstream isolates to echinocandin antifungal agents is still lacking in South Korea. We performed a prospective multicenter study to determine the species distribution of Candida bloodstream isolates and their susceptibility to five antifungal agents, including caspofungin and micafungin. A total of 639 isolates were collected from 20 tertiary hospitals between September 2006 and August 2007. Antifungal susceptibilities were determined through the use of the CLSI broth microdilution method M27-A3. The overall species distribution was as follows; Candida albicans (38%), Candida parapsilosis (26%), Candia tropicalis (20%), Candida glabrata (11%), and miscellaneous Candida species (5%). Although C. parapsilosis and miscellaneous Candida species were less susceptible to both echinocandins, all 639 isolates were susceptible to both caspofungin and micafungin (MIC, <= 2 mu g/ml). Nearly all isolates (99.7%) had a MIC <= 1 mu g/ml to amphotericin B. Resistance to fluconazole and voriconazole was found in 0.8% and 0.3%, respectively, among all Candida isolates, with C. glabrata and C. krusei isolates displaying the greatest level of resistance. This is the largest multicenter candidemia study conducted in South Korea and shows that non-C. albicans Candida species, including C. parapsilosis, constitutes over 60% of all Candida species isolates recovered from the bloodstream. In addition, the rates of resistance to all five antifungals, including two echinocandins, are still low among bloodstream isolates in South Korea.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据